If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

The NRA Continues To Compromise On The Second Amendment

The NRA Continues To Compromise On The Second Amendment

While the GOA – Gun Owners of America, JPFO – Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, and a multitude of others have never compromised on the Second Amendment; much to this authors dismay the NRA unbelievably continues to compromise on the Second Amendment, while continuing to put their hand out for financial contributions from those that feel NO COMPROMISE on the Second Amendment or the Constitution is acceptable…
Talk about a Judas…

"The National Rifle Association has been in support of workable, enforceable gun control legislation since its very inception in 1871."
—NRA Executive Vice President Franklin L. Orth
NRA's American Rifleman Magazine, March 1968, P. 22

A few of the more heinous compromises of the NRA in recent history are:

Failure to follow through with their promise that repealing the Hughes Amendment to the FOPA 1986 will be a high-priority. Moreover, public education on the Constitutionally Protected lawful ownership of Full-Auto and other NFA/Class III firearms.

E.G.: Following the unconstitutional 1986 Class III weapons ban...

Wayne LaPierre stated, "Repealing the machine gun amendment...will be a high priority," and promised the NRA's members that the organization would "actively work toward the repeal of the recent machine gun ban and will take all necessary steps to educate the public on the sporting uses and legal ownership of automatic firearms."
They have not done diddly in over two-decades…
WTFU Sheeple…

It is long past time for lawyers and others to speak about the true meaning of the amendment. In an interview with Charlayne Hunter-Gault on The MacNeil/Lehrer Newshour on December 16, 1991, former United States Chief Justice Warren Burger stated that the Second Amendment "has been the subject of one of the greatest pieces of fraud, I repeat the word 'fraud' on the American public by special interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime." [105] He continued, "they (the NRA) have mislead the American people." [106] The gun control debate is difficult enough without entering false issues into it. [107]: Battle Over the Brady Bill

The quote above explains the problem we are facing. Both sides of the gun control debate — with the exception of Gun Owners of America and many pro-gun groups at the state level — are supporting the Veterans Disarmament Act (HR 2640).

September 2009 American Hunter NRA Official Journal of the National Rifle Association: Special Report By Chris W. Cox NRA-ILA Executive Director p17-18. “Firearms Freedom Act” One issue that’s received a lot of publicity is the “Firearms Freedom Act” – state legislation that tries to exempt firearms, ammunition and accessories from federal regulation, as long as the gun or other item is made in a single state, for use only in that state. This legislation was enacted this year in Montana and Tennessee, and proposed elsewhere. The idea behind the legislation is to challenge federal gun laws in court. While reducing federal controls worthy goal, this kind of litigation faces major obstacles – mainly because the Supreme Court has given Congress a very long leash when it comes to activities that could affect interstate commerce. (For example just four years ago, the Supreme Court held that the federal government could still enforce federal drug laws against Californians who grow their own marijuana for medical use.) Because of these issues the NRA will continue to focus on the other kinds of pro-gun legislation described in these pages. An even more important point is that no one should try to take advantage of the Montana or Tennessee “Firearms Freedom Acts” without consulting a competent attorney and being prepared to pay large legal fees. Anyone makes firearms commercially, without complying with federal law, is likely to be prosecuted. “Firearm Freedom Act” supporters have never planned to test these laws in criminal cases, and no one who puts himself in that situation should expect support from the NRA.

This is simply spineless, I have discussed the FFA at length with the individual in Montana whom wrote it and they DO plan to test it in federal court ASAP. While I adamantly disagree with the way the Montana & Tennessee Firearms Freedom Acts are written; because they themselves compromise that the NFA, GCA, FOPA, NICS and other federal infringements still apply; and that as written it could simply be trading Federal Firearm Infringement for State Firearm Infringement; it’s a significant step in the right direction; towards the abolishment of infringement pre-existing, fundamental, unalienable rights, re-affirmed by the Constitution and the Second Amendment…

For those that do not know the history of the NRA’s Second Amendment compromises; this is the Benedict Arnold approach; when it looked like he was going to end up on the losing side; instead of digging in and saying hell-no, like we did at Lexington & Concord and elsewhere; Benedict Arnold played both sides of the fence until he could no longer and was ultimately chased out of the country with his tail between his legs.

Inviting Anti-Second Amendment Record Politicians to speak on behalf of Second Amendment support at NRA conferences… Such hypocrites include but are not limited to:

Governor Willard Slick-Mitt Romney (R-MA).

Juan McCain (R-AZ).

Senator Fred Thompson (R-GA).

Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC).

Failing to oppose and condemn other Obama Anti-Constitution & Anti-Second Amendment record nominees, and their Senate confirmations thereof. (Besides Sotomayor)

-- Deal between NRA leadership and Democrats leaves Republicans in the dark --

Wednesday started out as a routine day in the U.S. Congress, with Representatives attending congressional hearings, meeting with constituents, perhaps devising clever new ways to pick our pockets.

At 8:30 in the morning an email went out to House Republicans indicating that a gun control bill, recently introduced by Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY), was on the Suspension Calendar (normally reserved for "non-controversial" bills).

Many Representatives didn't see that email until it was too late. Less than three hours later, the bill passed by a voice vote. The bill in question, H.R. 2640, is a massive expansion of the Brady Gun Control law, the subject of many previous alerts by Gun Owners of America.

Its passage in the House is a case study in backroom deal making, unholy alliances and deceit. A sausage factory in a third world country with no running water has nothing on today's U.S. Congress.

Millions of Americans have joined the NRA, send money for dues and are solicited many times each year for donations to assist with the legal rights of gun owners-- or so they say. Well, they are paying their lawyers all right, but not to defend the rights of those they claim to represent.

On October 8th, in a case before the District of Columbia Federal Court, NRA attorney Stephen Halbrook made the following statements to the Court in response to the Judge claiming the right of government to place restrictions on the right to bear arms.

“YOUR HONOR, WE ARE HERE WANTING TO REGISTER HANDGUNS. WE ARE NOT HERE WANTING UNRESTRICTED ACCESS. WE'RE NOT HERE ASKING TO CARRY THEM, OTHER THAN IN THE HOME.

Later in the proceedings there was this exchange.

“THE COURT: YOU'RE SAYING THAT THE GOVERNMENT CAN IMPOSE REASONABLE RESTRICTIONS?

For many years the NRA has been selling us out to the government. They have supported every restriction government could concoct to limit the right of citizens of this country to own and carry firearms. I documented this fact in an article over two years ago. Republished here… NRA: Pro Second or Government Lapdogs? Price of Liberty

Not so long ago I was having an email exchange with a writer at another site on the subject of the NRA sell out. I was amazed when this former law enforcement officer, who claims the Second Amendment is the “backbone” of freedom, said he would continue to support the NRA because they have a good youth education program (Eddie Eagle) and you had to be a member to belong to most gun clubs. Hey, Idiot, what damn good is that going to be when we can no longer own a firearm!

Folks, it is time to fish or cut bait. Without the right to own and carry firearms we are done. If you perchance are waiting for those freedom-loving Republicans to come to your aid, please send me a note from the gulag. At least the democrats tell you they are going to take your guns if they get the opportunity.

If you are standing around waiting on the "pretend to be Christian" to stand up for us by doing away with the assault weapons ban right before the election next year -- don’t forget to take your Prozac.

Just like the NRA, we give the government power by recognizing and supporting it. It then uses our money to make them more rich and powerful and to ultimately sell us out and enslave us.

Just keep voting and sending money to the turncoats like the NRA. Life as an unarmed slave will be your just reward.

Perhaps they will let you watch as your daughters and wives are sold to the highest bidder, but probably not, as you will not have been seen for several years if you are a threat to government as a former gun-rights zealot. Just can’t beat that "Patriot Act".

Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result is a sure sign of insanity. – Albert Einstein.

Don’t forget to put that tooth under your pillow!

Is the blood shooting out of your eyeballs yet?

Apparently the NRA believes that true supporters of the Second Amendment have A.D.D. like the Socialist Gun Ban Obama & Company supporters have…

I have been a lifetime member for decades, but I am sick and tired of the NRA’s COMPROMISE approach to their support of the Second Amendment. While I cannot take back the money I paid long ago for my lifetime membership, I certainly can stop flushing my Second Amendment support dollars down the NRA crapper…

Moreover, instead give those dollars to the GOA, JPFO, GONV, OathKeepers and others who still hold that the Second Amendment is non-negotiable…

I encourage all No-Compromise Supporters of the Constitution and Second Amendment as they were written and intended by our founding fathers to email, snail mail, telephone and fax the NRA – The National Rifle Association, to implore the NRA to cease and desist their Compromise approach to supporting the Second Amendment…

Add to this, I had a friend (VN Vet) that wanted to join the NRA until he got an NRA telemarketer that wanted him to go lifetime. When he hesitated the caller got huffy and, as he put it, down right rude.
I emailed the NRA to inform them of this and never got a reply.
I joined GOA today.

If you are going to quote my text at least do me the courtesy of reading all of it.

Originally Posted by Boomer

Philosophically I am with the GOA as I dont believe in compromise either. The reality is compromise is a necessary evil.

Assuming you just read that you will see we are on the same side but lets get on with it.

Originally Posted by Boomer

Philosophically I am with the GOA as I dont believe in compromise either. The reality is compromise is a necessary evil.

While it is all well & good to stand on principle of "Shall not be infringed" lets get real shall we? It is a very different world today then when our forefathers had the genius to put pen to paper & craft this nation. A arm in those days was a decidedly different animal then it is today. Hell a field piece of those days, the terror of the battlefield is of little consequence today.
Today automatic rifles are commonplace (I support there private ownership BTW) but what about Claymore mines, Recoilless rifles & Vulcan cannons, are they not also arms? Should they likewise "Not be infringed"? If you say yes you are either naive or a fool. If you say no then you are a hypocrite & we are back to square one.
So where does that leave us? That compromise is a necessary evil & GOA beating their collective chests is nothing but a recruiting ploy.

Lets get super real here. You want to say "Shall not be infringed" & back down on nothing eh? What is better to be altruistic & have all of nothing or be realistic a little of everything because if we thump our chests & keep quoting the 2nd amendment we will lose the hearts of the rest of the nation & I assure you when that happens we will indeed have all of nothing.

If you are going to quote my text at least do me the courtesy of reading all of it.

Assuming you just read that you will see we are on the same side but lets get on with it.

While it is all well & good to stand on principle of "Shall not be infringed" lets get real shall we? It is a very different world today then when our forefathers had the genius to put pen to paper & craft this nation. A arm in those days was a decidedly different animal then it is today. Hell a field piece of those days, the terror of the battlefield is of little consequence today.
Today automatic rifles are commonplace (I support there private ownership BTW) but what about Claymore mines, Recoilless rifles & Vulcan cannons, are they not also arms? Should they likewise "Not be infringed"? If you say yes you are either naive or a fool. If you say no then you are a hypocrite & we are back to square one.
So where does that leave us? That compromise is a necessary evil & GOA beating their collective chests is nothing but a recruiting ploy.

Lets get super real here. You want to say "Shall not be infringed" & back down on nothing eh? What is better to be altruistic & have all of nothing or be realistic a little of everything because if we thump our chests & keep quoting the 2nd amendment we will lose the hearts of the rest of the nation & I assure you when that happens we will indeed have all of nothing.

I read your post the first time and my response stands...

Just what party of "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" do you not understand?

Did we not start the Revolutionary War @ Lexington & Concord because the British wanted to take our cannons and powder away and limit the number of weapons & types thereof and powder we could have and where we could store it?

Just because through our own ignorance and neglect of the Constitution we have allowed compromises does not mean we have to accept them as prima facie evidence and just bend over and keep letting them take the rest bit by bit...

For somebody whom is flying a OathKeeper Avatar you really should have some one on one conversations with Stewart Rhodes...

The President of Grassroots South Carolina sent me a response to one of my emails. He said they are a non-negotiating organization when it comes to strictly following the letter of the law as held in the Second Amendment. "We fight, we don't compromise", he said.

While I will stand with you in solidarity we have a fundamental difference of opinion.
Until such time as we are able to self police our nation & remove the vermin that infest it I can not advocate the ownership of military grade weapons without stringent background checks.

Originally Posted by Bohemian

For somebody whom is flying a OathKeeper Avatar you really should have some one on one conversations with Stewart Rhodes...

I would like that; but even so everything I have read or heard he has never advocated the unrestricted distribution of military grade hardware.